In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

i agree with barska

stingermanstingerman Member Posts: 6 ✭✭
edited January 2008 in Ask the Experts
just got mine from sportsman guide 50.00 bucks to my door 6.5x20x50
you can really see up close what you are shooting at they have several other models also available
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • CubsloverCubslover Member Posts: 18,601 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have two of their scopes. Worth 3-4x what I paid for them.

    Decent stuff.
    Half of the lives they tell about me aren't true.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • tsr1965tsr1965 Member Posts: 8,682 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have said it before and will repeat it once again. When it comes to sporting optics, in the form of rifle scopes, binoculars, and rangefinders, the old saying does hold true....you get what you pay for. Unless you have run across some one who needs cash, and has a Burris, Leupold, Nikon or better for sale for $50.00, you have not gotten yourself a deal. What you have inadvertantly acquired is going to be a headache.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Guns & GlassGuns & Glass Member Posts: 864 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Optics:
    Are like women. All have the same equipment, but work differently.
    Make up any woman so she looks better (some need it) It's still her.
    You can paint the barn so it looks better, it's still a barn.
    "Air brush a photo"

    Take low end optics apart, you'll see what your missing. Use them in a true scientific, controlled, documented testing enviroment along side other brands. Only then can completely cold calculated, impartial results be determined, and easily "seen"

    Have many samples of what poor/fair, good, better, and best are. It's so easy show the differences.

    TSR1965 correctly stated "You get what you pay for" has some company.

    "You get & pay for what you know"

    "You pay for what you want"
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Wehrmacht_45Wehrmacht_45 Member Posts: 3,377
    edited November -1
    I have a Barska and I have a Nikon. You do notice a real difference in clarity. Both hold a zero on a 223 AR, but I think the Batska might not on a 375 H&H while a Nikon would.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lpaalplpaalp Member Posts: 951 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I bought a high end Barska (on sale for $200). Hung it on a 25-06, fired less than 100 rounds over a couple of weeks. It suddenly developed (what appears to be)a second verticle crosshair slightly separated from the first.

    Now I have a Leupold on the 25-06 and a Barska in the basement.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jtmarine0831jtmarine0831 Member Posts: 908 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The lower end Barskas are fine for low recoil rifles and will serve well for along time. As everyone has said you get what you pay for but some of the Barskas are an exception. I currently have 3 of the SWAT series now, one on my Mod.70 StealthII in 308, one on my 700 in 7mm RemMag, and a newly aquired Savage 114 in 7mmRemMag. Yes the clarity is not near as good and the higher end Nikons and Leopoulds and etc. but these particular scopes are tough as nails. I am not a real big fan of the less expensive Barskas expect for on a rimfire but the SWATs on my 70 and 700 have several thousand rounds under their belts and not a hint of problems.

    Anywho, hope you have some luck out of it and Good Shooting![;)]

    Jeremy
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • PearywPearyw Member Posts: 3,699
    edited November -1
    I bought 3 of the 6.5x20 Barska's and have been impressed with them. I have one on a Colt AR-15 Target and the other on a 22 rifle.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ladamsladams Member Posts: 604 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    the 6.5-20 is a nice scope for the price. Is it the best scope out there, no where close. But for a casual plinking gun or even a deer rifle it is more than good enough. I have never seen the need to have 600 dollar scopes on rifles that get occasional use. That being said I was given a Leopold vx-iii and it sits on my deer rifle, but I probably would not have paid for it myself.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • stingermanstingerman Member Posts: 6 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Sorry guys just wanted to clarify something i bought the barska for my ruger 10/22 in another post someone was looking for a scope for there 22 and i simply agreed for fifty bucks you cant beat it to hit the bull at 50 or 100 yards if i was looking for something nicer definitly go with loupy or nikon but if you want to spend more than your rifle go Swarovki or Shmidt and Bender personally i dont want to spend more than the rifle on a scope unless i were in a competition or going after Osama.......thanks for the feedback
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • JustCJustC Member Posts: 16,056 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    junk scopes fail at the most unopportune moments. If you think a $100 scope is worth it,..then buy one. Eventually,....you'll all be shooting the same scopes we recommend. For the price of a Barska,..you can't even buy the lense coatings on a decent scope. If you want to be accurate,..then buy something else,...if you just need to be "good enough", then try a Barska.

    I trust bushnell far further than Barska,..and I have had them fail on me[V] Burris signature is about the lowest end scope I'll buy,....and I can fervently recommend them.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.